PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[SilverFox2]

The board PL appointed or not would have to come up with irrefutable documented reasoning as to why they havent found in citys favour, it cant just be becuase the pl said so and the red top fans want it to be so

I agree and hope that they act in a totally unbiased manner.
However, I recall even CAS verdict was 2 to 1 with the PL nominated panelist voting against us.

 

[cityboy2602]

Maguire stated clearly he had been sent the document. That was a stupid thing to say for an expert. I am sure he has seen the document but is now in delete mode.

 

[Craggers]

FWIW, I've heard recently - albeit indirectly - that we should be cleared of all the main charges but could get found guilty of the non cooperation charges which would be a fine but possibly also a small points deduction. I'll add that the points deduction doesn't make any sense to me because if we only get done for non cooperation then we've not gained a sporting advantage. I'm also not buying that we've not cooperated either - sure, we'll have dug our heels in on certain things but that doesn't necessarily equate to non cooperation - but perhaps this is City offering the PL a way out of the mess that is clearly of their own making and giving them a small win to quieten the red shirt cartel clubs.

Not sure I buy this. Surely it'll be hard for PL to prove non cooperation when our submitted accounts were independently audited every year.

 

[mancboy]

I agree and hope that they act in a totally unbiased manner.
However, I recall even CAS verdict was 2 to 1 with the PL nominated panelist voting against us.

as well they might but that isnt the point, whatever the verdict is there has to be damn good, legally binding reasons to go down whatever route they do

 

[gocity]

I agree and hope that they act in a totally unbiased manner.
However, I recall even CAS verdict was 2 to 1 with the PL nominated panelist voting against us.

fairly sure it wastn't the PL who nominated the panelist, it was Uefa, who had brought the charges

 

[halfcenturyup]

fairly sure it wastn't the PL who nominated the panelist, it was Uefa, who had brought the charges

To be fair to @SilverFox2 , there has been so much going on it's difficult to remember who is the fuckor and who is the fuckee at any given time. Football these days, eh?

 

[Gazza]

I agree and hope that they act in a totally unbiased manner.
However, I recall even CAS verdict was 2 to 1 with the PL nominated panelist voting against us.

The last desperate act of a drowning man.

 

[SilverFox2]

fairly sure it wastn't the PL who nominated the panelist, it was Uefa, who had brought the charges

Sorry all. Thanks for the correction.

I knew he batted for the. opposition and voted accordingly

 

[SilverFox2]

as well they might but that isnt the point, whatever the verdict is there has to be damn good, legally binding reasons to go down whatever route they do

Fair point.
Only the verdict, or whatever it is called, is detailed not the individual Panelist reasons to vote that way.

 

[mancboy]

Fair point.
Only the verdict, or whatever it is called, is detailed not the individual Panelist reasons to vote that way.

well if the verdict is 2-1 against us then it will have to be documented why the the panelists came to those verdicts so in effect it would show why they voted in a particular way.